Rt Hon John Bercow MP Response to the High Speed 2 Phase One Draft Environmental Statement Contents

Effect of HS2 on the Buckingham Constituency ............................................................................. 3 Draft Environmental Statement Overview ...................................................................................... 4 Sound ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Road realignments and obstructions to rights of ways and footpaths .......................................... 4 Assessment of impact................................................................................................................... 4 Community Forum Area 11 Stoke Mandeville to Aylesbury ..................................................... 5 Community....................................................................................................................................... 5 Cultural Heritage .............................................................................................................................. 5 Hartwell House ............................................................................................................................ 5 Glebe House, a grade II listed building........................................................................................ 5 Hartwell Grade II* Regional Planning Guidance and Conservation Area .................................. 5 Ecology ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Landscape and Visual Assessment .................................................................................................. 6 Replacement of viaduct at Sedrup with an embankment and culvert .......................................... 6 Replacement of viaduct at Lower Hartwell with an embankment and culvert ............................ 6 Realignment of the A418 Oxford Road (Sedrup) ........................................................................ 6 Socio-economics .............................................................................................................................. 6 Sound, noise and vibration ............................................................................................................... 6 Traffic and transport......................................................................................................................... 6 Community Forum Area 12 - Waddesdon and Quainton .............................................................. 8 Community....................................................................................................................................... 8 The Lodge, Doddershall ............................................................................................................... 8 Cultural Heritage .............................................................................................................................. 8 Waddesdon Manor Park ............................................................................................................... 8 Doddershall House ....................................................................................................................... 9 Ecology ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Grendon and Doddershall Meadows Local Wildlife Site ............................................................ 9 Further mitigation ........................................................................................................................ 9 Landscape and Visual Assessment .................................................................................................. 9 Lower the alignment between Waddesdon and Quainton ........................................................... 9 Auto-transformer feeder station and National Grid substation near Quainton ............................ 9 Socio-economics ............................................................................................................................ 10 Sound, noise and vibration ............................................................................................................. 10 Traffic and transport....................................................................................................................... 10 Waddesdon Bypass .................................................................................................................... 10 1

Station Road, Quainton .............................................................................................................. 10 Community Forum Area 13 - Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode .................... 11 Community..................................................................................................................................... 11 Demolition of property............................................................................................................... 11 Infrastructure Maintenance Depot, Steeple Claydon ................................................................. 11 Passenger Station at Steeple Claydon ........................................................................................ 12 Satellite Maintenance Compound, School Hill .......................................................................... 12 FCC Environmental Ltd Sidings ................................................................................................ 13 Cultural Heritage ............................................................................................................................ 13 Ecology .......................................................................................................................................... 13 Finmere Wood............................................................................................................................ 14 Sheephouse Wood ...................................................................................................................... 14 Socio-economics ............................................................................................................................ 14 Sound, noise and vibration ............................................................................................................. 14 Twyford ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Calvert and Calvert Green.......................................................................................................... 15 Traffic and transport....................................................................................................................... 16 Infrastructure Maintenance Depot ............................................................................................. 16 New station on East West Rail for site operatives ..................................................................... 16 East-West Rail............................................................................................................................ 16 Permanent closure of Perry Hill ................................................................................................. 16 Community Forum Area 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley ......................................................... 17 Community..................................................................................................................................... 17 Turweston playing fields ............................................................................................................ 17 Ecology .......................................................................................................................................... 17 Wildlife ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Landscape and Visual Assessment ................................................................................................ 17 Viaducts ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Pylons ......................................................................................................................................... 18 Tunnel past Turweston ............................................................................................................... 18 Socio-economics ............................................................................................................................ 18 Sound, noise and vibration ............................................................................................................. 18 Traffic and transport....................................................................................................................... 18 Construction traffic .................................................................................................................... 18 Conclusion......................................................................................................................................... 20

Effect of HS2 on the Buckingham Constituency

Since proposals were first put forward for a High Speed Rail link between London and Birmingham, it was clear to me and to my constituents that the Buckingham constituency would fare badly as a result. Little did we know at the time the sheer extent of devastation that this project would create. In my constituency alone 10 residential properties will be demolished and 9 further properties will be rendered obsolete. Communities will be destroyed, businesses will be displaced and the environment will be irretrievably ruined. In my 16 years as a Member of Parliament, HS2 is the single biggest issue I have had to deal with and one of the few subjects on which there is near unanimous opposition amongst my constituents. Once completed, up to 18 400m long trains will run through the area every hour all day, well into the night. For rural Buckinghamshire, an area characterised by beautiful landscapes and bucolic tranquility, HS2 is ruinous. Villages so peaceful they were once used as backdrops in the television series Midsomer Murders are set to be cast into the shadow of high speed trains which will thunder past at speeds of up to 360 kilometres per hour. Though I have consistently fought for the project to be dropped and I continue to do so, in recent times I have turned my attention to ensuring my constituents get the best possible deal if the Government decide to proceed. It is now clear that the Government has every intention of pushing forward with High Speed 2 and it is only right that I stand with my constituents in their fight to protect their homes, communities and livelihoods as effectively as possible. My response to this consultation incorporates correspondence I have received from individual constituents, local Councils and various stakeholders. I have attended as many Community Forum meetings as I have been able to do and listened very carefully to the concerns of those present. A number of pragmatic suggestions have been put forward at these meetings which, while included in the Draft Environmental Statement, have been deemed inappropriate by HS2 Ltd. Along with my constituents, I will continue the fight to secure better mitigation to protect affected communities for generations to come. The Chief Executive at HS2 Ltd claimed her organisation will promote high speed rail and balance community, environmental and economic issues 1. The areas affected in my constituency fall midway between London and Birmingham and will have no tangible benefits from the High Speed rail line. As you will note from my response, I firmly believe that too much attention has been paid to focusing on the economic implications of the project - which are themselves the subject of hot contention - and the importance of community and environment seems to have been relegated.

Draft Environmental Statement Draft Code of Construction Practice, Appendix 3, p64.

Draft Environmental Statement Overview

Mitigation Overall, I do not believe that the Draft Environmental Statement goes far enough in addressing the very real concerns held by vast numbers of people not only in my constituency but across the country. The Statement identifies elements of the Proposed Scheme as having a significant effect but fails to come up with suitable mitigation or solutions. It is simply unacceptable to say there would be other significant residual effects but no further practical mitigation measures have been identified at this stage 2. If this project is to go ahead, effective solutions must be found and they should be devised before the project is allowed to go ahead. Rejection of alternatives Through speaking with my constituents and attending a number of Community Forum meetings, I know a number of well thought-out and pragmatic alternative options have been put forward. These have, however, largely been rejected by HS2 Ltd with little justification. Where reasons have been provided, they almost inevitably make reference to the additional costs associated with the alternative suggestion. Given the commitment to balancing the needs of the community with environmental and economic needs, I do not accept that a proposal should be rejected solely on cost grounds. The project has already reached staggering levels of expenditure and I believe money can be found to fund mitigation measures which seek to protect communities. Conversely, if HS2 Ltd and the Government decide that it can affordably proceed only without such protection, plainly it is improper for it to proceed at all. Sound I respond in detail to aspects of this project affecting parts of my constituency. In terms of the overall Statement, I remain deeply dissatisfied with the Operational Sound Contour Maps. The maps indicate average noise levels (Leqs) which is all well and good if our ears hear sound in averages. HS2 should supply peak sound figures (Lmax) in order that those living and working close to the line can be fully apprised of the impact of HS2 in their area. This observation has repeatedly been made to me by concerned constituents. Road realignments and obstructions to rights of ways and footpaths The areas affected in my constituency are largely rural with scattered community facilities. Residents in affected villages using amenities in surrounding areas must be assured that ease of access to vital facilities will not be compromised. Assessment of impact On numerous occasions in the Draft Environmental Statement, the overall adverse impact on communities is described as moderate or minor. For people whose homes, communities and livelihoods will be destroyed, I suggest the impact is far from minor and the HS2 Ltd assessment should reflect the views of those the project will affect. I am hopeful that the wording will be changed in the Environmental Statement so it does not appear either to dismiss the devastating impact of HS2 overall or to second-guess the effect of HS2 on individual communities.

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 11 Stoke Mandeville and Aylesbury. 3.5.13 p42

Community Forum Area 11 Stoke Mandeville to Aylesbury

Parts of my constituency fall within this Community Forum area, specifically the Fleet Marston area, Stone, Bishopstone and Terrick Hartwell, Upper Hartwell and Sedrup; the latter three being conservation areas. In my constituency, the HS2 line will pass within 1.1km of Bishopstone, 1km of Stone, 800m of Upper Hartwell and 330m of Lower Hartwell. The population within 1km of the route is approximately 15,700 people3. Significant areas of concern are the plans to run HS2 under the Oxford Road (A418) and the intention for the Proposed Scheme to cut across the grounds east of Hartwell House, a Grade I listed building.

Community
The area is largely rural and agricultural with key facilities based in Aylesbury. While the village of Stone is serviced by a local shop, Sedrup has no community facility at all and Hartwell is only serviced only by a riding school. The village of Stone has a local store, a village hall, two churches, a public house and two restaurants. Given the rural nature of this area, it is important that access to facilities in surrounding villages and towns remains adequate.

Cultural Heritage
Three of the conservation areas that fall within this Community Forum area also fall within the Buckingham constituency: Sedrup, Upper Hartwell and Hartwell. All construction works should be carried out with sensitivity to the valued heritage of the area. Hartwell House Hartwell House is a Grade I listed National Trust building and is in the top 2.5% of significant listed buildings in the country. Dating back nearly 1000 years, the HS2 line runs hazardously close to Hartwell House and appropriate mitigation must be implemented to protect this national asset whilst also considering the impact of such mitigation on surrounding properties. Glebe House, a grade II listed building Glebe House is described in the Draft Environmental Statement as being of moderate heritage value 4. While the heritage value may be considered moderate by HS2 Ltd, its community value is significantly greater and I object most strongly to the displacement of constituents and demolition of a property which is part of a small, close-knit community. Hartwell Grade II* Regional Planning Guidance and Conservation Area The Draft Environmental Statement concedes that both of these community assets will experience significant effects5. I note that no further mitigation measures have been identified at this time 6 and I urge HS2 Ltd to continue to explore further mitigation options in these areas. Specifically, HS2 Ltd needs to ensure that any loss of land or detriment to the overall quality of the asset is reflected in compensation to the community.

3 4

2011 national census data Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 11 Stoke Mandeville and Aylesbury. 6.5.4 p53 5 Ibid, 6.5.5 p54 6 Ibid, 6.5.9 p54

Ecology
The Draft Environmental Statement identifies permanent adverse effects on the conservation status of reptiles, bats and the great crested newt owing to the loss of habitat. It is regrettable that no tangible mitigation measures have been included in the DES and I am hopeful that ample and effective measures are brought forward.

Landscape and Visual Assessment

Replacement of viaduct at Sedrup with an embankment and culvert On the basis that an embankment and culvert will be less visually intrusive 7 than a viaduct, I welcome the decision to alter plans in this area Replacement of viaduct at Lower Hartwell with an embankment and culvert On the basis that an embankment and culvert will be less visually intrusive 8 than a viaduct, I welcome the decision to alter plans in this area Realignment of the A418 Oxford Road (Sedrup) The Draft Environmental Statement makes clear that the realignment of the A418 Oxford Road will constitute a major adverse effect on residents living on Mayflower Close in Hartwell. The magnitude of change is high9. I urge HS2 Ltd to do all it can to ensure that residents in Hartwell are sufficiently safeguarded against any adverse effects caused by HS2.

Socio-economics
Given that the residual socio-economic effects are still being assessed, I am unable to make any comment.

Sound, noise and vibration

The eastern part of Hartwell around Oxford Road (A418) has been earmarked for significant airborne noise effect and the forecast noise from railway operations may exceed the daytime threshold set by the Noise Insulation Regulations and the night-time Interim Target identified in the World Health Organisation Guidelines 10 impacting two properties in this Community Forum Area. HS2 Ltd must make an undertaking to mitigate this problem and attenuate sound as far as is possible. If individual properties require further sound-proofing to abate completely the sound from HS2 and construction works associated with the project, HS2 Ltd should make compensatory payments to owners to pay for such work to be carried out.

Traffic and transport

Realignment of the A418 Oxford Road (Sedrup) I understand that the National Trust has consulted widely and come forward with a proposal to realign the A418, a proposal accepted by HS2 Ltd in the Draft
7 8

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 11 Stoke Mandeville and Aylesbury, 2.6.38, p33 Ibid, 2.6.47, p34 9 Ibid, Table 9, p71 10 Ibid, 11.6.12, p85

Environmental Statement11. A number of my constituents living in the Hartwell area will be seriously affected by this drastic realignment (between 250m and 300m south of existing alignment12), especially those on Sedrup Lane, Meadoway, Willowmead and Mayflower Close. I welcome the commitment from HS2 Ltd to consider concerns over the proposed A418 diversion from residents at Sedrup 13 and hope that it stays true to its word. I recognise the need to mitigate the impact on the landscape in the area and develop with sensitivity to the environment, but I urge HS2 Ltd to reconsider this matter and come forward with an option which balances the need to protect Hartwell House with the need to ensure that local residents are not significantly disadvantaged as they would be by such an extreme realignment. Realignment of Nash Lee Road (B4009) There are concerns about the potential realignment of the B4009 Nash Lee Road near Terrick. HS2 Ltd should undertake to engage with the local community in order that a solution is agreed which is acceptable to those living in the vicinity. I understand that an alternative solution is available which would circumvent the need to cause significant disruption.

11

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 11 Stoke Mandeville and Aylesbury, 2.6.21, pp 3031 12 Ibid, 2.6.56, p35 13 Ibid, 2.6.63, p36

Community Forum Area 12 - Waddesdon and Quainton

In this part of my constituency, HS2 passes the east of Waddesdon prior to meeting and following the alignment of the disused railway line which runs from Aylesbury to Quainton. In this area, HS2 runs approximately 10km. HS2 Ltds current proposal is to realign Station Road at Quainton to the north-west, some 500m north of the existing road. HS2 Ltd proposes to build new bridges across the HS2 line and the Quainton to Calvert line to ensure access to the Buckingham Railway Centre. HS2 Ltd proposes an auto-transformer feeder station and a National Grid sub-station at Quainton to the south of Edgcott/Buckingham Road, to the east side of the HS2 line. The auto-transformer feeder station is a permanent compound containing equipment which facilitates the transfer of electrical power between the National Grid and the railway. The auto-transformer feeder station is 2km x 0.75km and sits adjacent to the National Grid substation which is 1.75km x 1.25km. in open countryside. Having attended a number of Community Forum meetings in the area, I have listened to the arguments in favour of a lower alignment which would reduce the height and size of structures required for all the crossings in the area. I agree that this proposal would mitigate the noise and visual impact of HS2 in the area, but I am also aware of the practical difficulties associated. I am concerned that such a proposal could have an impact on additional properties in the area and I do not believe that the displacement of households should be a favoured option.

Community
The Lodge, Doddershall The demolition of properties in this area is limited to one (The Lodge, Doddershall). While I appreciate the damage could have been much worse with multiple demolitions, I believe all steps should be taken to avoid the unnecessary demolition of a residential property. Buckinghamshire County Council has proposed a realignment of the route in this area to avoid The Lodge and I am inclined to support this proposal on the basis that, in changing the alignment, no other properties will be adversely affected as a result. The Draft Environmental Statement makes reference to potential impact on other adjacent properties14 as a result of a changed alignment in this area. HS2 Ltd must clarify for certain what the impact would be.

Cultural Heritage
Waddesdon Manor Park Waddesdon Manor Park dates back to the 18th century and carries significant cultural value. The Park will experience significant effects15 as a result of the construction of HS2 and it is important that HS2 Ltd adopts and adheres to a Code of Construction Practice which recognises the social and historical sensitivities attached to the various cultural assets in the area. Mature vegetation on the north east boundary of Waddesdon Manor should be protected and maintained during construction and operation. The trees in this
14 15

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 12 Waddesdon and Quainton. 2.6.31, p28 Ibid, 6.5.4 p. 46

area act as effective screening, mitigating the appalling visual impacts of HS2 on the Manor.

Doddershall House Doddershall House is a Grade II* listed building of high heritage value dating back to the 19th Century. This cultural asset will experience significant effects as a result of construction activity in relation to the construction of an overbridge and the autotransformer feeder station. As above, it is important that HS2 Ltd adopts and adheres to a Code of Construction Practice which recognises the social and historical sensitivities attached to the various cultural assets in the area.

Ecology
Grendon and Doddershall Meadows Local Wildlife Site The Grendon and Doddershall Meadows Local Wildlife Site carries significant ecological importance. HS2 Ltd needs to ensure that any works in this area limit the loss of meadow land which supports a number of farmland birds and provides important breeding sites for invertebrate species of conservation concern16. Further mitigation I note from the Draft Environmental Statement that further mitigation measures are currently being considered17 and I am hopeful that ample and effective measures are brought forward which satisfactorily address the ecological implications of HS2.

Landscape and Visual Assessment

Lower the alignment between Waddesdon and Quainton A number of local residents have called for the vertical alignment of the HS2 line to be lowered between Waddesdon and Quainton. This will unquestionably bring greater protection from noise pollution and visual intrusion. As above, I am inclined to support this proposal on the basis that, in changing the alignment, no other properties will be adversely affected as a result. The Draft Environmental Statement makes reference to potential impact on other adjacent properties18 as a result of a changed alignment in this area. HS2 Ltd must clarify for certain what the impact would be. Auto-transformer feeder station and National Grid substation near Quainton I appreciate the position of those residents living in the area who do not wish to see these developments close to their properties. I would support any adjustment to the Proposed Scheme which results in a reduced impact on the community and the

16 17

Buckinghamshires Mitigation Blueprint for HS2, Buckinghamshire County Council. p52. Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 12 Waddesdon and Quainton. 7.5.18 p.55 18 Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 12 Waddesdon and Quainton. 2.6.31, p28

environment. I look forward to studying HS2 Ltds further examination of this matter.

Socio-economics
Given that the residual socio-economic effects are still being assessed, I am unable to make any comment.

Sound, noise and vibration

The planned vertical alignment of HS2 in Quainton has given rise to much concern about noise impact. I support Buckinghamshire County Councils call for a cutting in this area which serves the purpose of both sound and visual mitigation. HS2 Ltd must undertake to mitigate this problem and attenuate sound as far as is possible. If individual properties require further sound-proofing to abate completely the sound from HS2 and construction works associated with the project, HS2 Ltd should make compensatory payments to owners to pay for such work to be carried out.

Traffic and transport

Waddesdon Bypass I welcome the proposal to build a bypass around Waddesdon. In the short term, the bypass would reduce the impact of construction vehicles associated with HS2. Heavy Goods Vehicles and construction traffic should avoid using the A41 through Waddesdon during the construction phase; the existing local infrastructure is not strong enough to cope with significant increase in usage. In the longer-term, a bypass would alleviate the impact of heavy traffic flows through Waddesdon19. Given the devastation HS2 will cause in the area, the bypass should be paid for by the Department for Transport by way of compensation. Station Road, Quainton On the basis that discussions are ongoing between Buckinghamshire County Council and the local community about the development of alternative options in this area, I await the publication of the Environmental Statement before commenting on HS2 Ltds proposal for Station Road. Needless to say, the design adopted should reflect the requirements of the community which the road serves.

19

Buckinghamshires Mitigation Blueprint for HS2, Buckinghamshire County Council. p52.

10

Community Forum Area 13 - Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

The majority of this Community Forum area falls within the Buckingham constituency. The route moves from Sheephouse Wood to Calvert in a cutting. An over bridge at School Hill will serve the purpose of vehicular crossing for the online diversion of School Hill. The development of HS2 in this area will also necessitate the relocation of existing railway sidings used by the operators of the Calvert landfill site to the east of the HS2 line. An over bridge will be built adjacent to the Calvert landfill site to facilitate access for vehicles. The area is significantly blighted by the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD). The IMD will consume some 37 hectares (and up to 90 hectares during the construction phase) 20 and will see the character of this beautiful rural area devastated. Beyond Steeple Claydon and the IMD, HS2 will pass under the Bicester to Bletchley line before arriving at Twyford which it passes on culverts and embankments. The line continues in a cutting (up to 2km in length and up to 10m in depth) as it passes a number of properties in Chetwode, a hamlet which dates back to the Domesday Book.

Community
Demolition of property The Proposed Scheme causes significant damage in this part of my constituency. In total, nine residential dwellings in Calvert and Chetwode will be demolished along with a significant number of farm buildings and outbuildings; 19 buildings in total are earmarked for demolition in the area. Unquestionably, this will cause significant local disruption not only to the topography of the area but to the community as well. With regards to Chetwode, the Draft Environmental Statement claims that the demolitions would cause considerable disruption to the occupiers and would require them to relocate, in terms of the effect on the local community the permanent loss of these dwellings would be minor adverse in each location and goes on to claim it is not considered that there would be any significant effects on the community resulting from the demolitions21. The demolitions in Chetwode equate to 10% of the current housing in the area and, as the local Member of Parliament, I beg to differ with HS2 Ltds assessment. A neighbourhood as small and close-knit as Chetwode will be adversely affected by this loss of both property and community, a fact which, on reflection by HS2 Ltd, should be readily apparent. HS2 should make clear in the Environmental Statement that the effect of property demolitions in Chetwode is significant. Infrastructure Maintenance Depot, Steeple Claydon Steeple Claydon is a thriving village dating back to the Domesday Book; Calvert is a comparatively new village, founded as a hamlet in the Victorian era to house the workers of the local brickworks. Between these two villages is the proposed site of the IMD and railhead. It goes without saying that I wholly oppose the development
20

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. Footnote, p16 21 Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 5.5.3, p46

11

of the IMD at this location; the nature of the operations taking place there and the rural location makes it a wholly unsuitable place to build a Depot with a requirement for so much land. My constituents living in this area will see previously open land turned into an industrial sized storage unit surrounded by security fencing, running up to 2km long, lit throughout the night. In addition, the site will provide temporary worker accommodation. The Draft Environmental Statement states that the estimated duration of use for this facility is up to 6 years. This is by no means temporary for the residents in the area and I share their very real concerns about the potential impact on local amenities. In addition, there are concerns about traffic implications as well as visual and noise impacts. Given the rural location, the roads around the IMD are not suitable for such heavy usage. There are already concerns about the current road infrastructures ability to sustain existing traffic and I struggle to see how these roads will be able to accommodate the additional HGV traffic22. HS2 Ltd should undertake to provide sufficient noise protection and bunding, as well as incorporate the needs of the community into the operating model for the site; this might include, inter alia, the introduction of a travel plan to support sustainable travel by IMD staff, as suggested by Buckinghamshire County Council23. Given the proximity of the IMD to Steeple Claydon, Calvert and Calvert Green, it is important that residents are fully apprised of the impact of its night time operations. In the final Environmental Statement, HS2 Ltd must publish the number of maintenance trains using the track at night. Passenger Station at Steeple Claydon It has been suggested by local residents and Buckinghamshire County Council, amongst others, that a passenger stop should be provided on the East West rail line at Steeple Claydon. Given that HS2 equipment is expected to make its way into the vicinity using the East West rail line, it seems logical to install a passenger halt in the area. The installation of a station in Steeple Claydon would go a great way in compensating the community for the adverse effect HS2 will have. Satellite Maintenance Compound, School Hill Given the proximity of this compound to the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot, I do question the need for this additional burden on the community, I urge HS2 Ltd to examine the feasibility of incorporating this facility into the IMD. Whilst not ideal, on balance I think it would be preferable if the blight was confined to one area. I am led to believe that HS2 Ltd and Network Rail are in discussions with respect to the development of a tunnel running from the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot and under the East-West rail line to allow access to the eastbound HS2 line. Aside from the obvious long-term benefits for my constituents, in the short-term it would mean any satellite construction compound in the School Hill area could be smaller than currently planned and will be needed only for a much shorter period time. I fully support this proposal and, given the palpable benefits for both HS2 Ltd and the community, I trust that it will progress.
22

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 2.3.18, p20 23 Buckinghamshires Mitigation Blueprint for HS2, Buckinghamshire County Council. p58.

12

FCC Environmental Ltd Sidings HS2 Ltd proposes, in the Draft Environmental Statement, to relocate the sidings. One HS2 proposal is to move the sidings westwards, adjacent to the proposed Satellite Maintenance Compound on School Hill and in close proximity to a number of properties in Calvert and Calvert Green24. Clearly a refuse offloading point in such close proximity to residential properties is completely unacceptable. As well as the obvious odour pollution, it will lead to amplified noise levels and increased visual blight. The Draft Environmental Statement makes clear that alternative options are being examined25. It is important to consider the fact that FCC is currently moving its entire operation away from residential properties in the villages of Calvert and Calvert Green. FCC has confirmed that they have land available to relocate the existing siding facility nearer to the new facility. If the sidings are to be located at the site proposed in the Draft Environmental Statement, it would mean that FCC is unable to carry out its work as the School Hill bridge construction work will render the existing rail track inaccessible for an indeterminate period of time. Were the sidings to be moved to be closer to the FCC site, it would mitigate the impact on local residents, alleviate the need for HS2 Ltd to fund additional mitigation in the area and allow FCC to continue to operate. In addition, a relocation of the sidings to the land close to the FCC site would eliminate the need to bring drainage works to the west (towards Calvert). Instead, drainage could be to the north where access is already available (for the purposes of the Satellite Maintenance Compound).

Cultural Heritage
Shepherds Furze Farmhouse and Chetwode Conservation Area Shepherds Furze Farmhouse and Chetwode Conservation Area are both earmarked to experience a significant physical effect26 while prehistoric and post-medieval archaeological remains will be removed. A number of other assets, with heritage values of moderate to high, will also experience significant effects. I note that no further mitigation measures have been identified at this time 27 and I urge HS2 Ltd to continue to explore mitigation options to ensure that any detriment to the overall quality of the asset is reflected in compensation to the community.

Ecology
Calvert Jubilee BBOWT Nature Reserve Local Wildlife Site This wildlife site is dominated by a former clay pit which is one of three which flooded after the closure of the Calvert Brickworks in 1991. The nature reserve
24

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 2.2.6, p15 25 Ibid, 2.7.1, p31 26 Ibid,6.5.5, p49 27 Ibid, 6.5.10 p50

13

homes wildfowl, birds and butterflies. This area will be affected by the HS2 route (the proposed route runs along the eastern edge of the reserve) and construction work for the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot. HS2 severs the nature reserve on a shallow embankment and it is likely that there will be significant implications for wildlife. HS2 Ltd should undertake to compensate the local community for the loss of this local amenity. Calvert Railway Station Local Wildlife Site The Draft Environmental Statement claims that it is unlikely that any species of interest would return to Calvert Railway Station local wildlife site on School Hill, and that there would therefore be no additional effects from the Proposed Scheme28. The local community reports the wildlife site is already growing and hosting flora and fauna. The Environmental Statement should re-examine this site and make clear that there will be additional effects from the Proposed Scheme. When the Satellite Maintenance Compound becomes redundant, HS2 should reinstate a local wildlife site for the benefit of the community.

Finmere Wood Finmere Wood will be affected by HS2 and it is important that the engineering is tailored to ensure minimal impact on this Special Site of Scientific Interest. The ancient woodland is also home to the Bechsteins bats, a species identified as very rare in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and listed in Annex II of the EC Habitats and Species Directive. This particular species is also listed as Nearly Threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Natures Red List29. Mitigation in this area must adequately mitigate damage to ancient woodland and seek to protect the habitat of the Bechsteins bats. Sheephouse Wood Sheephouse Wood, also a designated SSSI, similarly homes Bechsteins bats. If the alignment of HS2 is unable to change in this area, HS2 Ltd needs to come forward with proposals to mitigate the impact of damaging unique ancient woodland. It is also important to ensure that Sheephouse Wood remains unaffected by HS2. Though there is no mention of land take in this area in the Draft Environmental Statement, my constituents are concerned, as a result of conversations with HS2 Ltd staff, that this may be the case.

Socio-economics
Given that the residual socio-economic effects are still being assessed, I am unable to make any comment.

Sound, noise and vibration

Green Tunnel at Chetwode
28

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 7.5.19, p58 29 IUCN 2012, available at http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/14123/0

14

HS2 comes within 250m of the conservation area in Chetwode which includes the Grade I Listed Church. The Church is believed to house some of the oldest medieval stained glass windows in the country and the protection of these from vibrations caused by HS2 is of paramount importance. There is likely to be significant visual blight from HS2 on Chetwode. A number of residential properties at School End, and properties within The Hermitage and Priory House estates will have a clear view of the railway cutting and the over bridge. HS2 should re-examine proposals, consistently argued for by me, Buckinghamshire County Council and local residents, to provide a cut and cover (green) tunnel in the area. I have raised the issue of noise impact on Chetwode with HS2 and the Department for Transport on a number of occasions since it was indicated as a red dot area of high noise, even after mitigation, on the Appraisal of Sustainability document published in 201230. Even after proposed mitigation, Chetwode residents will still be forced to endure significant adverse noise effects31. Given HS2s commitment to balance economic, environmental and community needs32, I am very disappointed that this desperately needed mitigation measure has been dismissed out of hand simply on the basis of cost. This is particularly frustrating as no costings are provided in the Draft Environmental Statement.

Twyford Given the proximity of Twyford to the HS2 line, there are genuine concerns amongst residents about the noise impacts. Like Chetwode, the line will come within 250m of Twyfords Grade I listed Medieval Church. Effective noise mitigation is essential in this area and I support the communitys campaign to have bunding installed above pantograph level. Though I appreciate that the bund would be of significant height (some 8m), as a Member of Parliament it is my duty to reflect the views of my constituents and I can certainly see the merit this proposal which will mitigate against noise and visual intrusion. Calvert and Calvert Green The Draft Environmental Statement suggests that a higher noise barrier or landscaping earthworks are both further mitigation options33. Given the level of devastation in the area, it is important to ensure that adequate noise mitigation is in place. I understand that published noise levels take into account only HS2 and fail to include noise from other sources to which HS2 will add. In this area alone, the residents of Calvert and Calvert Green already have to endure noise from the FCC operations, and this will be exacerbated by noise from not only HS2 but the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot and, possibly, the Satellite Maintenance
30 31

Appraisal of Sustainability, Volume 2, p109 Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 11.6.13, p85 32 32 Draft Environmental Statement Draft Code of Construction Practice, Appendix 3, p64. 33 Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 11.6.16, p85

15

Compound. Noise level indicators should take into account noise from other sources in order that local residents are fully apprised of the situation in which they will find themselves.

Traffic and transport

Infrastructure Maintenance Depot There are concerns about traffic implications of the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot. Given the rural location, the roads around the IMD are not suitable for such heavy usage. There are already concerns about the current road infrastructures ability to sustain existing traffic and I struggle to see how these roads will be able to accommodate the additional HGV traffic34. There is no evidence that HS2 has thought through this issue and it is frankly lamentable that the Phase One Draft Environmental Statement is silent on the subject. New station on East West Rail for site operatives Given the rail infrastructure already exists for IMD workers to travel by rail on the Bicester to Bletchley line, the development of an alighting point at Calvert would, theoretically, certainly ease the capacity on the fragile road infrastructure. It also offers the prospect of a permanent stop at Calvert which will benefit the community as a whole. East-West Rail In spite of numerous requests from me and my constituents, it is still unclear how HS2 will fit in with the East-West rail line in the area. Given the proposals to develop an Energy from Waste incinerator in the same area, I am concerned about the lack of analysis of how these large projects will impact on each other. Permanent closure of Perry Hill Perry Hill runs between the A41 and Buckingham. Given the importance of Perry Hill to the local transport infrastructure, it is essential that this road remains operational. Furthermore, it would not be acceptable to expect a significantly increased volume of traffic to run through Twyford.

34

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 13 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode. 2.3.18, p20

16

Community Forum Area 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley

Two parishes in my constituency fall within this Community Forum area. Turweston and Westbury are both affected by HS2. In this part of my constituency, HS2 runs on a viaduct across the Ouse flood plan, less than a kilometre to the west of Westbury. The line then runs to the east of Turweston. HS2 will cross the A43 which will require changes to its alignment. Turweston and Westbury are significantly larger than any of the other nearby villages, combining newly-developed properties with their historic character.

Community
Turweston playing fields Power cables will be required on the playing fields and village recreation grounds to the west of Turweston. About 40% of The Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Field, part of the Queen Elizabeth II Fields Challenge campaign, will be required for the diversion of electricity and the construction of a cutting for the HS2 line. This bisection of the fields will leave that part of the land unusable. The Draft Environmental Statement itself acknowledges that the effect of this on Turweston is significant35. Therefore, the onus is on HS2 Ltd adequately to compensate the village for this loss. As there is no substitute land available in the vicinity to develop another playing field, it is important that an alternative recreational facility is secured. I am aware that Turweston Parish Council is in discussions with HS2 Ltd and other local bodies with a view to the construction of a cycleway between parishes and this seems to be a good, valuable asset which could be paid for by a compensation payment from HS2 Ltd: a moderately small gesture to offset the vast impact of HS2 in the area.

Ecology
Turweston Manor Grassland Local Wildlife Site This Local Wildlife Site will lose land as the proposed route cuts across the grasslands and floodplain of the Great Ouse River on a viaduct. Wildlife I understand the Draft Environmental Statement fails to make reference to otters, water voles and kingfishers living by the River Ouse in Westbury. An assessment of the impact of HS2 should be conducted.

Landscape and Visual Assessment

Viaducts In this part of my constituency, two viaducts are proposed which will have significant adverse impact on the landscape. The viaducts need to be screened to enhance the landscape for the communities affected. Constituents living in Westbury are concerned that, though the viaduct in that area will have a noise fence barrier but no details about what this actually means is included in the Draft Environmental Statement.
35 35

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley. 5.5.3, p42

17

Pylons To accommodate High Speed 2, a number of National Grid pylons, located to the east of Turweston, will need to be relocated. In the Draft Environmental Statement, the pylons have moved even closer to the village of Turweston and run across the playing fields. By way of compensation, HS2 Ltd should make an undertaking to install the electric lines underground. I have raised this matter with the Chief Executive and Head of Environment at HS2 Ltd and I would urge them to look at this matter again. The recreation field is used by many of those living in the area and, only recently, the local scout group used this playing field to fly kites: just one example of a village amenity earmarked for destruction as a result of HS2. The undergrounding of the power lines is a very important matter for the villagers affected and I do not believe it is a wanton or excessively luxurious request. Tunnel past Turweston I have made numerous representations both to HS2 Ltd and to the Department for Transport asking that a tunnel be built in this area. I note from the Draft Environmental Statement36 that options for a tunnel were evaluated but HS2 concluded that the potential environmental benefits...were not considered sufficient to justify the significant additional costs37. Given HS2s commitment to balance economic, environmental and community needs38, I am very disappointed that this desperately needed mitigation measure has been dismissed out of hand simply on the basis of cost. This is particularly frustrating as no costings are provided in the Draft Environmental Statement.

Socio-economics
Given that the residual socio-economic effects are still being assessed, I am unable to make any comment.

Sound, noise and vibration

I remain dissatisfied with the lack of information in the Draft Environmental Statement pertaining to noise levels. Local residents must be able to examine peak noise levels. The DES claims residential receptors...have been identified as likely to experience a significant adverse effect from HS2 noise alone. Combined with the additional noise pollution resulting from the realignment of A43, it is important that my constituents are thoroughly protected from excessive noise and attenuation measures should reflect this.

Traffic and transport

Construction traffic The maps accompanying the Draft Environmental Study39 indicate that construction traffic will no longer run through Turweston village but along a temporary road from the A422. I welcome this development. There are concerns, however, that huge
36 37

Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley. 2.6.2, p27 Draft Environmental Statement Community Forum Area Report 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley. 2.6.10, p28 38 38 Draft Environmental Statement Draft Code of Construction Practice, Appendix 3, p64. 39 Map Book Community Area 14 Newton Purcell to Brackley. Maps CT-05-065 and CT-05-064.

18

spoil heaps will be left where the cutting is dug and I should welcome confirmation in the Environmental Statement of how long they will remain. There is no indication as to the height of these spoil mounds and this matter needs clarifying.

19

Conclusion
I conclude by drawing on some of the key points I have made throughout this response. My concluding remarks are by no means comprehensive and the examiner of this submission should refer to my earlier comments. 1. Mitigation measures should balance the need to protect key aspects of the areas cultural heritage, including inter alia Hartwell House, Waddesdon Park Manor and Doddershall House, with the needs of local residents who may be adversely affected as a result of wellmeaning mitigation measures. 2. The Statement identifies elements of the Proposed Scheme as having a significant effect but fails to come up with suitable mitigation or solutions. It is simply unacceptable to say there would be other significant residual effects but no further practical mitigation measures have been identified at this stage. If this project is to go ahead, effective solutions must be found in advance and agreed by the community. 3. The train line or associated construction works will damage or completely devastate a number of community amenities in my constituency and it is important that HS2 recognises the need generously and appropriately to compensate affected areas in order that these facilities can be replaced. 4. HS2 Ltd must give an explicit undertaking to mitigate and attenuate sound pollution as far as is possible. If individual properties require further sound-proofing completely to abate the sound from HS2 and construction works associated with the project, HS2 Ltd should make compensatory payments to owners to pay for such work to be carried out. 5. Alternative options put forward by the local community have been dismissed on the basis of their potential adverse impact. Potential impact is an insufficient justification for excluding possible mitigation options and HS2 Ltd must come forward with greater detail. 6. For people whose homes, communities and livelihoods will be destroyed, I suggest the overall adverse impact as judged by HS2 Ltd does not begin to reflect the view of the community directly affected. HS2 Ltd should not second-guess the impact of design elements on individual communities. Its responsibility is to produce proposals for mitigation or, alternatively, properly and publicly to consider recommendations from the community. 7. HS2 Ltd must come forward with suggestions as to how to improve the public transport infrastructure in my constituency. Communities are being devastated in the name of a public transport project which from which they will see no tangible benefits. If there is any way that affected communities can benefit from the project, it should be incorporated into the scheme. 8. I have already identified steps the Government could take to compensate certain communities for the damage caused by HS2 Ltd. By way of compensation, I strongly urge the Government to ensure that rural communities impacted by the train route are supplied with high speed broadband internet. Considering that the case for HS2 draws on the benefits of economic growth through superfast connectivity between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds and my constituents will not benefit from this at all they should be entitled to superfast internet connectivity. 20

9. A number of meaningful, effective mitigation options have been rejected by HS2 Ltd on the grounds of cost. Since the Draft Environmental Statement, the Secretary of State for Transport, Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP, has announced that the overall cost of the project will be 57 billion40 some 24 billion more than the 33 billion figure originally cited. Given the significant increase in budget since HS2 Ltd deemed multiple mitigation options unsuitable on grounds of cost, I am hopeful that these discarded proposals will be looked at again in light of the new overall budget.

This Draft Environmental Statement fails to assuage any of my concerns and does not change my vociferous opposition to this monstrous project. By every yardstick, the HS2 plan fails to meet the test of serving the public interest. The business case is utterly flawed. The environmental damage that it will inflict upon great swathes of the countryside, including Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty in Buckinghamshire, will be chronic. Horrendous noise and widespread visual blight will be a fact of life if this unaffordable, unnecessary and unwanted project goes ahead. The cost to the public purse, already obscenely large, is rising exponentially and in an era of austerity it seems extraordinary even to countenance such an outlay. The mitigations proposed thus far have been very limited and I share the assessment of my constituents that HS2 has not even begun to reckon with the scale of what is required to alleviate the detrimental impact on the area which I represent. The consultation process has regularly been shown to be flawed, including by the Courts, and although I continue to attend Community Forum meetings, residents who participate have expressed grave dissatisfaction with the lack of responsiveness from HS2. In short, so far as my constituents and I are concerned, the HS2 project is all pain and no gain. I make this response in order to register the views and legitimate demands of my constituents but I reiterate that it would be far better if the Government were to discontinue the project altogether.

40

HC Deb, 26 June 2013, c343 21